Search results

You still didn’t answer. “Medieval Christians read Scripture differently” is not a standard. It is a historical claim. Were they right? Were they wrong? Could they be corrected? And by what standard? That is the question you keep dodging.

Fair enough. But that's a very different claim from what you said before. You said he was “far enough away to pass untouched.” Now you’re saying the footage is not conclusive. So your earlier claim wasn't established. Or he moved because the vehicle was moving into him. That's the point...

True, by itself. But that cuts both ways. Open Theists are not “denying Scripture” merely because we refuse to accept the Classical Theist interpretation of passages where God repents, relents, tests, investigates, responds, or says “now I know.” The accusation was that Open Theists deny...

I have no problem with these numbers. In fact, they are evidence for my position, not against it. Let's be clear here. The system we have currently is NOT the system I am advocating. I am not defending the modern prison state. I am opposing it. Locking people up like animals for years is...

No one claimed to read with no assumptions whatsoever. The point is that words still mean things, context still matters, grammar still matters, genre still matters, and bad interpretations can still be falsified. If your point is merely that readers have presuppositions, fine, that's obvious...

That you can't recognize the difference between [keeping a law that says "do not murder"] and simply not hating your fellow man is a glaring issue with your paradigm.

Yes. Impeding law enforcement investigations. If the footage shows him being struck by her vehicle and pushed several feet, would that change your verdict? Because that's what the footage shows. Timestamp: 16:49 So no, he did not “pass untouched.” And if your conclusion depends on Ross...

No. I got it only after several pages of evasion, and even now you are still hiding behind the same caveat rather than defend it. Calling it “common sense” does not prove it is either common or sensible. It is just another label doing the work of an argument. Then start arguing rationally...

“Darby” is not an argument. “Nineteenth century” is not an argument. “Heresy” is not an argument. “Political fatalism” is not an argument. If dispensationalism is false, refute the distinctions from Scripture. Otherwise you are just denouncing the label because you cannot answer the verses...

Because you say so? Genesis 2:19 does not say God brought the animals to Adam as a “teachable moment.” It says He brought them to Adam “to see what he would call them.” That is the reason the text gives. You don't get to change the reason to suit your beliefs. Because you say so? God...

He definitely said amoral. Captions are wrong. But they are definitely immoral, irrational, and devoid of values, too.

Man, you're all over the place. Some of these aren't even contradictions. Paul received his gospel directly from Christ and then "laid it out" before certain members of the Twelve. He wasn't consulting anyone about it. He was explaining it to them, because it was so radically different from...

There's no such thing as "CE" and "BCE." As for the actual year of Christ's birth, it was likely in 4 BC, probably late December, due to the positions and movements of certain stars that were the "Star of Bethlehem," Jupiter and Regulus. Which puts Christ's crucifixion around 30 AD, at around...

Even a slave can choose freedom over his current status.

Unfortunately, it doesn't help us determine the one-way speed of light. Super cool though!

As RD said: if it's not free, it's not a will.

God made man, gave man dominion over the earth, then later regretted making man and determined to destroy mankind from the face of the earth. That doesn't sound like a change in God's mind to you? The text does not merely say man changed. It says God was sorry that He made man. You can...

Idol Killer is an Open Theist who holds to Dynamic Omniscience, which is slightly different than what I believe, but I agree with a lot of what he says often. IK had Tim Stratton on his channel about two years ago.

The rest of your post is a bunch of dangerous nonsense itself, but the only thing worth responding to is this. The evidence for it happening is literally everywhere you look. "Not a literal worldwide deluge" "Symbolic myth" My foot. I encourage you to get out of your house and go look at...